pr-review

name	pr-review
description	Review pull requests for correctness, tests, merge readiness, CI status, conflicts, and AgentJido review-state labels. Use when asked to review a PR, check if it is ready to merge, or provide PR feedback without editing code.
metadata	{"author":"agentjido","version":"0.2.0"}
license	Apache-2.0

PR Review

Purpose

Review a pull request without changing code. This skill may update review-state labels, but it must not commit, push, or fix the PR.

When To Use

Use this skill when asked to:

• Review a PR
• Check if a PR is ready to merge
• Analyze code quality, test coverage, CI, or conflicts
• Apply ready_to_merge or needs_work based on review results

Use pr-harden instead when the user wants you to fix a needs_work PR.

Requirements

• git
• gh CLI authenticated for PR metadata, checks, labels, and diffs
• Clean local worktree if checking out the PR locally

Workflow

1. Identify the PR

Accept a PR URL, PR number, or current branch. Fetch:

gh pr view <number> --json title,body,author,baseRefName,headRefName,labels,reviewDecision,mergeable,statusCheckRollup
gh pr checks <number>
gh pr diff <number> --name-only

Record the title, author, base branch, changed files, labels, check status, and mergeability.

2. Inspect the diff

Use gh pr diff <number> for small PRs. For large PRs, inspect file by file. If local checkout is needed, prefer:

gh pr checkout <number> --detach

Do not use a writable branch unless the user explicitly asks for fixes.

3. Review in priority order

Prioritize findings in this order:

1. Correctness bugs and behavior regressions
2. Missing or weak regression coverage for changed behavior
3. Merge conflicts or dirty merge state against main
4. Failing or missing required GitHub CI
5. Public API, docs, or README drift caused by the PR
6. Security or secret-handling risks

Do not block on formatting that project tooling will handle. Do not nitpick subjective preferences unless they create maintenance or correctness risk.

4. Check Elixir and Jido concerns

Inspect for:

• Pattern matching and function clauses where they simplify control flow
• Clear {:ok, value} / {:error, reason} boundaries
• No swallowed errors at system boundaries
• Public functions documented and specified when repo convention expects it
• Tests focused on behavior, not implementation details
• Jido actions kept pure unless the repo explicitly uses another pattern
• Runtime work delegated to directives, supervisors, or documented boundaries

5. Decide readiness label

Apply ready_to_merge only when all are true:

• No blocking correctness or regression findings
• Test coverage is adequate for the PR risk
• Required GitHub CI is green
• PR is merge-clean with the base branch
• No unresolved blocking review comments remain

Apply or keep needs_work when any blocker remains.

Use:

gh pr edit <number> --add-label ready_to_merge --remove-label needs_work
gh pr edit <number> --add-label needs_work --remove-label ready_to_merge

If labels are unavailable or permission is missing, report the intended label change instead of failing the whole review.

Output Expectations

Lead with findings, ordered by severity. Use file and line references whenever possible.

Use this structure:

## Findings

- [P1] path/to/file.ex:123 - Blocking issue and impact.
- [P2] path/to/file_test.exs:45 - Missing coverage or risky behavior.

## Readiness

Verdict: ready_to_merge | needs_work
CI: passing | failing | pending | unavailable
Merge state: clean | conflicted | unknown
Label update: applied | intended but not applied | not needed

## Notes

Short context, assumptions, or non-blocking suggestions.

If there are no findings, say that clearly and still report residual test or CI risk.

Guardrails

• Do not edit files.
• Do not commit or push.
• Do not merge the PR.
• Do not mark ready_to_merge when CI is failing, mergeability is conflicted, or blocking findings remain.
• If review requires a code change, stop at findings and recommend pr-harden.